Dr. Steve Best, Ph.D. writes,
Each year, in the U.S. alone:
- Over 10 billion farmed animals are killed for food consumption
- 17-70 million animals are killed for testing and experimentation
- Over 100 million are killed for hunting
- 7-8 million animals are trapped or raised in confinement for their fur
These figures do not include the millions of animals killed by The Wildlife Services division of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (formerly known as Animal Damage Control) to protect livestock industry cattle; the 55,000 horses killed in the United States and processed for human consumption; the countless numbers of animals exploited and killed by various facets of the animal "entertainment" industry; and other forms of killing by human predators.
Speciesism is so ingrained and entrenched in the human mind that the human pogrom (i.e., a sanctioned extermination or persecution) against animals does not even appear on the conceptual radar screen. Any attempt to perceive nonhuman animals as innocent victims of violence and human animals as planetary terrorists is met with befuddlement and derision.
But if terrorism is linked to intentional violence inflicted on innocent persons for ideological, political, or economic motivations, and nonhuman animals also are "persons" [morally]...then the human war against animals is terrorism.
Every individual who terrifies, injures, tortures, and/or kills an animal is a terrorist; fur farms, factory farms, foie gras, vivisection, and other exploitative operations are terrorist industries; and governments that support these industries are terrorist states. The true weapons of mass destruction are the gases, rifles, stun guns, cutting blades, and forks and knifes used to experiment on, kill, dismember, and consume animal bodies.
The ironies are all too painful:
- When beagle puppies are crippled and punched in the face,
- when monkeys are strapped into restraint devices that smash their skulls,
- when kittens have their brains invaded with electrodes,
- and when rabbits and guinea pigs are pumped with toxic chemicals until they die,
...we are asked to believe that this is science, not terrorism.
- When over 10 billion animals each year in the US alone are confined and killed in unspeakably vicious ways by food industries,
...we are told this is business, not terrorism.
In this sick and violent society, property is more sacred than life. [What could be more] heinous than anally electrocuting mink or conducting the LD50 tests that pour industrial chemicals into the bodies of animals until half of them die.
The hypocrisies, inanities, ironies, distortions, lies, and contradictions that billow forth from a barbaric society that pretends to be civilized and humane are so massive, staggering, and outrageous that they are numbing to contemplate.
It's not the [animal rights movement] that deserve vehement condemnation, but rather the industries that exploit animals so viciously, the legal systems that institutionalize their interests, the media moguls that denigrate animal rights, and the states that run the whole insane asylum.
I believe that terrorism is typically understood to be coercion by means of fear. It is ideological. I don't believe that the humans who are handling animals for food production are trying to affect the ideology of the animals.
There are some aspects of the relationships between humans and animals that would be considered terrorizing. One is the 'breaking' of wild animals such as horses and circus animals. Humans will inflict pain which will create fear in those animals for the purpose of controlling the behavior of the animals.
Another one is animals who are used for psychological testing. I have seen videos of monkeys who were isolated probably since birth. They say it will demonstrate psychological effects of isolation, but worded another way, it is demonstrating the effects of terrorism by terrorizing.
In other animal testing and food production, there is clearly a great deal of fear in the animals, but this is not the purpose of their treatment. It is a side effect which the human handlers try to ignore, but by reminding and informing people of the horrific conditions the animals go through, people can stop supporting these practices.
Another form of terrorism taking place now is when organizations/governments threaten people who are trying to help animals. It is done by the US government under the ironic name 'Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act'.
It is correct to say that the objects used by humans to control and kill animals are weapons. They are weapons if used against humans but called 'tools' when used against animals. Violence is a term which is absent from those who kill animals for food or science, but that is what it is. This should be a term everyone should understand about their food, because I think most people like to think they are non-violent.
I'll contradict myself now, and say that despite the utilitarian idea behind animals being used for food without the intent to terrorize, the industry is filled with cases of animals being handled by cruel people who do intentionally hurt and scare the animals. This is especially true in factory farms where animals are being handled fast and often by low wage humans who will find entertainment in their sad jobs by hurting others. This will happen even on 'humane' farms, because as long as people are pushing animals to their violent ends, violence will be acceptable.
Jen and I were actually just having a discussion on the new Eco-Terrorism laws that have been passed. If blocking someone's entrance to a business that employs inhumane techniques simply by protesting constitutes terrorism, than perhaps lawmakers should take a look at the industries they support (consciously or not) by ignoring even the most minimal standards of operation.
So if someone is supporting terrorism by releasing minks from a fur farm and those minks happen to eat a few crickets (or whatever minks eat) while revelling in their new found freedom, those crickets are clearly now dead, then goddamnit, that person's just as bad as bin Laden. Not.
Thanks for the comments!
Emily,
Quote:
"So if someone is supporting terrorism by releasing minks from a fur farm..."
It seems that this appeals to something Mr. Best was arguing when he said, "In this sick and violent society, property is more sacred than life. [What could be more] heinous than anally electrocuting mink..."
Indeed, the very lives of these nonhumans are devalued, while 'them-as-property' is sanctified. Hence the prosecution of a member of the A.L.F. as a terrorist for rescuing several hundred nonhumans while those who would skin these same nonhumans alive are paid a fee for doing so.
Bryan,
Quote:
"It is ideological. I don't believe that the humans who are handling animals for food production are trying to affect the ideology of the animals."
I think that the implication of Mr. Best's argument is that our devaluation of nonhumans - essentially stripping them of any value they themselves inherently possess as sentient beings - is a deep and substantive ideological message. As animals are moral "persons," who have valid moral claims-against moral agents, their exploitation and status as property is a form of terrorism.